CFTC Commissioner Chilton Calls for an "Olympic-Caliber Regulatory Regime"

Chilton suggested that an insurance fund, similar to the ones established in the securities and banking industries, be established for futures customers. [SL Comments: Obviously, this suggestion is made against the background of MF Global and Peregrine, which failures create the need, or at least a desire, to restore confidence in the futures industry. Query: If there were such a fund, would it now be bankrupt in light of those two failures? Does such a fund create "moral hazard" in that it disincentivizes customers from considering the creditworthiness of their FCMs? (As a constant critic of Dodd-Frank, I would also observe that it is somewhat ironic that the CFTC argues that we require an insurance backup for FCMs where a supposed major purpose of Dodd-Frank was to force client money into FCMs. For me, this could be said to demonstrate that many clients would be safer if they could hold their collateral in triparty at banks, rather than FCMs, as was permitted before Dodd-Frank)].

View statement in full here(links externally to CFTC website).